Literature DB >> 17549521

How does pattern of feeding and rate of nutrient delivery influence conditioned food preferences?

A J Duncan1, C Elwert, J J Villalba, J Yearsley, I Pouloupoulou, I J Gordon.   

Abstract

Ruminant herbivores have been shown to learn about food properties by associating food flavours with the food's post-ingestive consequences. Previous experimentation supporting the conditioned food aversion/preference hypothesis has generally employed very simple diet learning tasks which do not effectively represent the wide range of foods selected within single bouts typical of wild, free-ranging ruminant herbivores. We tested the ability of a ruminant herbivore to associate a food with artificially administered nutrient rewards in a designed experiment where we altered the temporal pattern of encounter with the food as well as the nature (fast or slow reward) of the post-ingestive outcome. Twenty-four goats were offered branches of Sitka spruce (SS) and Norway spruce (NS) for 4 h per day on two days per week for five weeks. The pattern of feeding varied with treatment such that the species on offer changed every hour (short) or every 2 h (long). The energy treatment altered the reward delivered during Sitka consumption so that animals were dosed either with predominantly sugar (rapidly fermented), predominantly starch (slower fermentation rate), or with water (placebo). Preference was measured on the day following each learning day. We expected that goats would find it easier to associate SS with post-ingestive rewards when the duration of encounter was longest, and that associations would be stronger with the most rapidly digested post-ingestive reward. In the event, goats did not alter their consumption of SS in response to the treatments. Our results suggest that at the scale of temporal resolution of encounters with different plant species (1-2 h), and at the different rates of experiencing post-ingestive consequences tested in this experiment, ruminants do not appear to discriminate the nutritive properties of foods predominantly through a post-ingestive feedback mechanism. They must, instead, use a range of cues-including post-ingestive consequences-to assess food properties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17549521     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-007-0771-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  6 in total

1.  Preference for wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of starch.

Authors:  J J Villalba; F D Provenza
Journal:  Br J Nutr       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 3.718

2.  Can goats learn about foods through conditioned food aversions and preferences when multiple food options are simultaneously available?

Authors:  A J Duncan; S A Young
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Browse selection in response to simulated seasonal changes in diet quality through postingestive effects.

Authors:  Alan J Duncan; Sheila A Reid; Vera Thoss; David A Elston
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.626

4.  A theory of associating food types with their postingestive consequences.

Authors:  Jonathan M Yearsley; Juan J Villalba; Iain J Gordon; Ilias Kyriazakis; John R Speakman; Bert J Tolkamp; Andrew W Illius; Alan J Duncan
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2006-03-20       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Preference for flavored wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal administrations of sodium propionate.

Authors:  J J Villalba; F D Provenza
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 3.159

6.  Changes in portal blood metabolites and insulin with feeding steers twice daily.

Authors:  L E Chase; P J Wangsness; J F Kavanaugh; L C Griel; J H Gahagan
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 4.034

  6 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  A pharm-ecological perspective of terrestrial and aquatic plant-herbivore interactions.

Authors:  Jennifer Sorensen Forbey; M Denise Dearing; Elisabeth M Gross; Colin M Orians; Erik E Sotka; William J Foley
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 2.626

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.